Jump to content

Discussion: GMs and GM Powers


Uberstein
 Share

Recommended Posts

Since nobody else seemed willing to make this topic, I figure I'll go ahead and do it.

 

Right now, the rules for GM's are incredibly vague. The powers and limits of the office are not described in any real fashion, and we're left with an office that can do practically whatever it pleases without explanation. Personally, I feel this needs to change, and that there should be stricter rules defining GM powers.

 

There's also the issue of this: "2 GMs are to be voted upon every 2months after a 48 hour nomination period. You may vote for yourself for GM but you may not nominate yourself."

 

Which is a fairly relevant portion of the rules brought up by Lysergide. According to the rules, there should only be two GMs, not three. So, that, combined with the apparent dislike of my job so far as a GM, leads me to my resignation from the position. Go to Rudy and TBM with your problems, I'm tired of hearing them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously three GMs are needed because if the two current GMs argue then you need a third to be the tie breaker otherwise issues/problems etc will just get forever stuck in limbo.

 

In the meantime GM powers should only really be the following:

 

1) To make spy rolls when required.

2) To make judgement on any claims of rule braking,

3) To create polls so they are legitimate after a discussion thread has been made. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that three GMs are needed, to serve as a tiebreaker.

How about this:

Game Moderator "Wipe" Effects

There are two kinds of wipe effects:
- Type one, total impossibility. IE Death star. Total RP wiped. These kind of god mods are easy to spot, and will be called quickly, so little RP to go back and redo.
- Type two, feature impossibility. IE Fighter jet with a laser. These are sometimes unnoticed, and when found/called, RP should be paused, while they are argued out in a separate thread. If the feature is found to be impossible, then the RP continues as if all actions had occurred minus that feature. IE, you still used your fighters, but since they didn't have lasers, they got annihilated or took more damage or whatever is deemed reasonable.

 

This is from CNRP1. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously three GMs are needed because if the two current GMs argue then you need a third to be the tie breaker otherwise issues/problems etc will just get forever stuck in limbo.

 

In the meantime GM powers should only really be the following:

 

1) To make spy rolls when required.

2) To make judgement on any claims of rule braking,

3) To create polls so they are legitimate after a discussion thread has been made. 

 

I agree that we need three GMs. Not only does it prevent ties but it allows for more people to share in the workload.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the matter of the two GM's, I feel the entire body be dissolved until the next vote for the next two GM's are put into place. There has already been too many actions made by a body of three which misrepresented the rules of the RP and the community of the RP.

 

GM's should not be allowed to vote on matters, it would mean they are expressing their personal opinion on a matter when they should be representing a neutral stand point on a matter.

 

GM's should be allowed to make discussion threads, and only make voting threads after a discussion is held on all matters, from rules to removal or addition of a player to the RP. Until the community can discuss a matter, no GM has the right to create a vote thread. And no vote thread should exist without a discussion existing prior to, unless it is an informal vote where the outcome does not effect the rules or actions of the RP and the players in it.

 

GM's should be fair arbitrators of the rules and not be effected by OOC views and opinion of another player or their RP.

 

And GM's should keep the community informed of discussions going on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And GM's should keep the community informed of discussions going on.

Apart from the post which on some points I agree with and others I vehemently disagree with, this is the one I disagree the most. GM's are not baby sitters nor are they minders for the players.

That being said, there should be at least three GM's to accurately serve this community in order to prevent any possibility of gridlock from happening.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need 3 GMs to prevent ties.

 

I agree with most of Lyser's post, excluding the updating people on things bit. I oppose it for the reasons Rudolph mentioned. I also like JED's ripping of the CNRP1 wipe rules, those are necessary.

 

In addition, I believe GMs should have the right to put holds on RPs as deemed necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...